Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 30200
Docket No. MW-29831
94-3-91-3-197
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Charlotte Gold when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO THE DISPUTE:
(Union Pacific Railroad Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the
Brotherhood that
(1) The Agreement was violated when the Carrier
assigned outside forces (Darden and Gloeb
Company) to prepare surfaces and apply paint,
stain and varnish to the walls and woodwork on
the twelfth floor and the elevator lobby of
the twelfth floor of the Headquarter's
Building on November 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22,
24, 25, December 11, 12, 13 and 14, 1989
(System Files S-262/900259 and S-260/900257).
(2) The Agreement was further violated when the
Carrier failed and refused to furnish the
General Chairman with advance written notice
of its intention to contract out said work as
required by Rule 52.
(3) As a consequence of the violations referred to
in Parts (1) and/or (2) above, B&B Painter R.
J. Cronican shall be allowed two hundred
fifty-six (256) hours of pay at the ist Class
Painter straight time rate."
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole
record and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved
in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the
meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over
the dispute involved herein.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing
thereon.
Form 1 Award No. 30200
Page 2 Docket No. MW-29831
94-3-91-3-197
This is a companion case to that in Third Division Award
30198. The work in dispute in that instance was the remodeling of
the third floor elevator lobby in the Omaha Headquarters Building.
At issue here is the remodeling of the twelfth floor in the
Headquarters Building.
This Board determined in that instance that there was not
compelling proof that the work of remodeling an office building was
the type of work that had been customarily performed by carrier's
B&B Subdepartment (that is, to such a degree so that it accrues to
them under the parties' general Scope Rule).
We held in that case that the claim could not be sustained.
We so hold here.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Attest:
Linda Woods - Arbitration Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 8th day of June 1994.